This country needs a Human Rights Commission

Aug 19, 2016 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The recent Press Release by the Guyana Human Rights Association needs to be read and understood in a national perspective. Too often in Guyana, we rush to judgment without first defining the problem. Hence, there is a tendency to create solutions to the wrong problem .
A sad example of this is the formation of the Guyana Ethnic Relations Commission. This apparently was designed to solve ethnic problems in Guyana. The true reality however is that Guyana needed a Human Rights Commission instead of an Ethnic Relations Commission. Thus the 400 Guyanese murdered in a partnership between Roger Khan, drug lords and the previous Government was not addressed by a politically directed and controlled , Ethnic Relations Commission. A Human Rights Commission run by professionals would have been a better solution.
By defining the problem as one of ethnicity instead of a globally defined human rights problem with UN approved bodies, commissions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 400 murders have not been appropriately addressed nor has justice been served because the State at the time, was seemingly involved, and would not prosecute itself. Mr. Mike McCormack criticized two main aspects of the State Asset Recovery Bill during national consultations last week. These two aspects were elaborated in the GHRA’s Press Release.
First, he criticized the “narrowness of focus of the new Bill” and I quote:
“If the Bill is passed without a serious effort to obtain genuine broad-based political support it risks prolonging ethnically polarized politics. Such support requires two things to happen: firstly broaden the scope of the Bill from asset recovery alone to a more substantive incorporation of the aims of the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) and, secondly, create a mechanism that brings a range of civic and private sector forces into the process of promoting the Bill. Anything less will inevitably prompt the question whether ‘anti-corruption’ for the ruling party ever meant more than pursuing those now in opposition for corrupt acts committed while in power.”
Mr. Mc Cormack fully well knows there are five substantive chapters of UNCAC, namely.
1. Chapter 11 _ Preventative Measures which states “States Parties are obliged to adopt coordinated policies that prevent corruption and designate a ‘body or bodies’ to coordinate and oversee their implementation”
2. Chapter 3 _Criminalization and law enforcement which states that “States Parties must criminalise bribery (both the giving of an undue advantage to a national, international or foreign public official and the acceptance of an undue advantage by a national public official), as well as embezzlement of public funds”
3. Chapter IV International cooperation which states that “State Parties are obliged to assist each other in cross-border criminal matters. This includes, for example, gathering and transferring evidence of corruption for use in court.”
4. Chapter V _Asset recovery .This is a ‘fundamental principle’ of the Convention, and one of its main innovations, is the right to recovery of stolen public assets. According to many observers, Chapter V is the main “selling point” of the Convention, and the reason why so many developing countries have ratified. The UNCAC provisions lay a framework for countries to adapt both their civil and criminal law in order to facilitate tracing, freezing, forfeiting, and returning (see www.U4.no UNCAC in a nutshell )– A quick guide to the United Nations Convention against corruption for embassy and donor agency staff ;the presumption of innocence vs. burden of proof.
Article 20 on illicit enrichment is controversial, because it imputes criminal behavior to individuals whose assets cannot be explained in relation to their lawful income. This has raised criticism of human rights advocates, saying that such requirements reverse the presumption of innocence protected by many legal systems. Defenders of the provision argue that prosecutors still shoulder the burden of proof, as they must demonstrate, beyond reasonable doubt, the lack of legal avenues for the accumulation of excess wealth or funds, and as being obtained through corrupt activities.
5. Chapter VI Technical assistance and information exchange In the Convention, technical assistance refers generally to support aimed at helping countries comply with the UNCAC’s provisions. Chapter VI includes provisions on training, material and human resources, research, and information sharing.
The State Asset Recovery Bill presented for National consultation last week is focused on exactly what UNCAC prescribes. While Mike Mc Cormack and the GHRA believe the objectives of the SARA Bill should be more broad, they conveniently forget there are many laws on Guyana’s books (E.G. theft, embezzlement, tax evasion) which criminalizes corruption) and that the AML/CFT Act also covers several serious or predicate offences related to corruption.
In addition, the GHRA should be aware that there are 8 teams currently working through the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Legal Affairs to creating Guyana’s first National Risk Assessment to comply with Guyana’s obligations as a signatory to UNCAC. Furthermore, in the Prime Minister’s Office there is a Guyana Country Report that is being developed in compliance with The Review Mechanism for UNCAC which is an intergovernmental process whose overall goal is to assist State Parties in implementing the Convention. The Serious Organised Crime Unit and the Integrity Commission are also in place.
Eric Phillips

Editor’s note; because of its length, this letter will conclude in our Saturday edition

---

---